Skip to main content
  • About Us
  • Careers
  • Contact

Search form

American Institutes for Research

  • Our Work
    • Education
    • Health
    • International
    • Workforce
    • ALL TOPICS >
  • Our Services
    • Research and Evaluation
    • Technical Assistance
  • Our Experts
  • News & Events

You are here

  • Home
1 Apr 2018
Report

Study of Title I Schoolwide and Targeted Assistance Programs: Final Report

Kerstin Carlson Le Floch, Jesse D. Levin, Drew Atchison, Courtney Tanenbaum, Steven Hurlburt, and Karen Manship, AIR
Stephanie Stullich, U.S. Department of Education

The Title I program of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) was created to aid high-poverty schools in providing supplementary services to low-achieving students. The schoolwide program (SWP) was created in 1978 to expand the flexibility of ESEA, allowing schools to use the Title I funds towards whole-school approaches that were aimed at improving the achievement of low-achieving students.

The SWP approach differs from the traditional targeted assistance program (TAP) approach by allowing schools to consolidate funds from multiple sources—including Title I—and not being required to ensure these funds are spent exclusively on low-achieving students. This study focuses on TAP and SWP programs and compares the services and resources they are able to provide using Title I funds and the processes they have in place for allocating these resources.  

Key findings include:

  • Although a majority of both SWP and TAP schools used Title I funds to hire teachers, such teachers accounted for a smaller percentage of Title I staff in SWP schools (41 percent) than in TAP schools (67 percent).
  • SWP schools were more than twice as likely as TAP schools to use Title I funds for instructional coaches, parent and community liaisons, technology support staff, and English learner specialists.
  • Both SWP and TAP schools most commonly used Title I-funded staff to provide supplemental instruction in reading and/or mathematics, but SWPs were more than twice as likely as TAPs to also use these staff for instruction in other subjects, data/analytics support, parental involvement, and other approaches.
  • In most Title I schools, districts and schools collaborated on decisions regarding the use of Title I funds, but principals in SWP schools were more likely than those in TAP schools to report making all or most decisions about how to use their school’s Title I funds (25 percent vs. 12 percent).
  • Few principals of SWPs reported that their school consolidated Title I funds with other federal, state, and local funds (6 percent), but a larger proportion (50 percent) indicated that they coordinated the use of Title I funds with other funds.
  • According to district administrators, the biggest challenge for consolidating Title I funds with funds from other sources was state accounting rules that require separate accounting for federal programs.
PDF icon Study of Title I Schoolwide and Targeted Assistance Programs: Final Report (PDF)
Education Week Blog: Could Schools Be Doing More With Title I Money?

Related Work

16 Mar 2015
Video

title-one-chism-interview.jpg

Monique Chism and Liz Grant

The Groundbreaking History of Title I

In recognition of the anniversary of Title I, Elizabeth Grant, AIR Vice President, sits down with Monique Chism, Director of the Office of State Support at the U.S. Department of Education, to discuss the history, influence, and future of this important legislation.
Topic: 
Education, Postsecondary Education
10 Sep 2013
Report

Adjusted Poverty Measures and the Distribution of Title I Aid: Does Title I Really Make the Rich States Richer?

Are current funding allocations accurately distributing Title I funds? According to a new report, when fully adjusted for regional differences, Title I funding patterns disproportionately favor rural school districts in low cost of living states.

Topic: 
Education, No Child Left Behind (NCLB)

Further Reading

  • Case Studies of Schools Receiving School Improvement Grants: Final Report
  • States Vary Widely in How They Target Federal Title I School Improvement Grants, According to Report Offering the First Examination of the Program
  • Three Things We Learned from the Study of School Turnaround
  • Building Teacher Capacity to Support English Language Learners in Schools Receiving School Improvement Grants
  • Evaluating Title I, Part D Funds and their Impact on Neglected and Delinquent Youth
Share

Contact

Kerstin Le Floch

Kerstin Carlson Le Floch

Managing Researcher
Image of Jesse Levin

Jesse D. Levin

Principal Researcher

Topic

Education
District and School Improvement
Equity in Education
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)
No Child Left Behind (NCLB)

RESEARCH. EVALUATION. APPLICATION. IMPACT.

About Us

About AIR
Board of Directors
Leadership
Experts
Clients
Contracting with AIR
Contact Us

Our Work

Education
Health
International
Workforce

Client Services

Research and Evaluation
Technical Assistance

News & Events

Careers at AIR


Search form


 

Connecting

FacebookTwitterLinkedinYouTubeInstagram

American Institutes for Research

1400 Crystal Drive, 10th Floor
Arlington, VA 22202-3289
Call: (202) 403-5000
Fax: (202) 403-5000

Copyright © 2020 American Institutes for Research®.  All rights reserved.

  • Privacy Policy
  • Sitemap